mramos1

Found this forum talking about a guy that can make lots of hydrogen with colloidal metals, turns out there is a US patent with details from August 2006.

I first noted the battery and switch (switch that shorts the battery), but if you read down in the experiments, and of course there was 2 videos on the forum. The battery is not needed, maybe to unplate the metals?

Company name is Airgen.

If this guy really has this, not sure why we have not seen it yet? But this could be big.

Attached Files

20060180464.pdf (292.7 KB, 115 views)

Nigel Goodwin

Depends if it works or not?, having a patent granted doesn't mean very much, it's probably yet another 'spoof' design?.

__________________
PIC programmer software, and PIC Tutorials at:
http://www.winpicprog.co.uk

Oznog

As you probably know, a patent does not mean the process is proven in any way. It doesn't show a process is legitimate.

Catalysts promote reactions, but they don't change the energy required. The idea that it could produce hydrogen without the required energy input is impossible. Much like the other thousand claims out there.

__________________
I thought what I'd do was I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes.

mramos1

Producing hydrogen in a car makes since as there is extra power waste from the alt. So for the home I agree..

But his claims and video show no power to it. Said that if he shorts two metals in the mixed of three colloidal liquid it runs, and open the switch it stops. I can get links to the videos.

Oznog

The alternator does not produce waste power. The alternator produces only a slight load on the belt when it has no output, but all the electrical power you take off it loads down the engine through the belt.

The alternator has little ability to slow the engine noticibly. The biggest alternators are on the scale of 3 hp electrical output. They'll suck a bit more than 3 hp off the engine which is not very noticible on a big engine. You'd see it in the mpg figures if you bother to test with a high alternator load vs minimum load.

__________________
I thought what I'd do was I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes.

Pommie

This appears to be a chemical process. If I take aluminium and hydrochloric acid I end up with aluminium chloride and hydrogen gas. The aluminium is consumed. This patent seems to be a mixture of metals and acids/bases that produce hydrogen on demand. The only difference between this and throwing aluminium foil in Lye (sodium hydroxide) is that this is controllable and therefore useful in a lab.

Mike.

tytower

It looks to me that this will all go into a vehicle and its hydrogen output fed to a fuel cell which will produce electrical power for the electric drive of the vehicle .

What it has to do with Alternators is zero for a start

All of this is well advanced technology except for the production of the gas which is bought in at present. Gas on demand means it can be produced intermitently when the fuel cell runs out

__________________
I Hate Microsoft-the site below says it well
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/micr...eMS_intro.html

Sceadwian

Considering the chemicals you'd need to use to mix to create your fuel likley cost more than gasoline, and they're highly dangerous to humans and require special DOT handling procedures for transport let alone use in an automobile it's completly silly. You're going to get more efficient energy storage if you just increase the fuel cell size into the space the hydrogen generating 'plant' is. If it's economically feasable at all it'd be in huge quantites at a refineing plant, not in the vehicle itself, that just makes no sense.

__________________

tytower

Err, no I think you are missing the main point. The device produces hydrogen on demand . A closed plant as small as it is in the boot would be just the same risk as a cylinder of hydrogen. You would not be handling any chemicals would you?
The idea is to produce a plant that can be safely carried round in the boot

__________________
I Hate Microsoft-the site below says it well
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/micr...eMS_intro.html

Sceadwian

It produces hydrogen on demand from concentrated chemical reagents, just as dangerous as toteing around liquified or compressed hydrogen.

__________________

Hero999

I though that alternators were horribly inefficient (50% is typical) so you'd draw 6hp, still nothing even on a small car with an output of 60hp.

__________________
I also post at the following sites:
http://www.stop-microsoft.org http://www.heated-debates.com
Screen name: Aloone_Jonez

mramos1

I have a fellow that is going to install the cell I made in his car (a jeep) and tell me the results. He travels all day long..

We can see if the additional alternator draw counters the gas the goes in the intake. Anything beyond this in hydrogen right now, it just takes too much power to make the gas to me..

Sceadwian

What you're going to end up with is an overly complicated electrochemical capacitor which wastes energy at every conversion stage. Instead of generating electricty from the process of the primary cell, it's being used to directly electrolyse the water and the hydrogen gas generated is being used for a fuel cell to convert it back into electricty? If you can't see the fundamental flaw in that kind of setup no amount of disuasion is going to stop you, but it's your money.

__________________

Sceadwian

Something caught my eye in the patent text when I was scanning it.

"Background"
[0003]
Where it refered to H2 as elemental hydrogen, which is a really silly error to make. Elemental hydrogen means only one hydrogen atom, not two. No technical document that makes that kind of 'gaffe' shouldn't be taken very seriously.

__________________

mramos1

It was not complex. It is a sealed case (old water filter unit from when I moved in this house and I doubled its size and saved the old one), stainless steel, water and a battery. Only one complex chemical (H2O), only one complex element (Stainless steel; if that is an element) and +/- power (I have 12 volts DC batteries all over so that was not so complex).

I was bored.

Bubbles came out after a couple of minutes (I was schocked), lit one and boom. My kids and I thought it was sort of cool (kids were scared/smart and left; they were loud). It draws so little, 4 D cells will run it.. A friend wants to put it in his car. I said OK..

What is the harm in showing one more thing that does not work? But I hear you and understand your point.

But it is low power and does not get hot. I was sure it would get hot and saw that water is not that great a conductor. I talked to a chemist friend and first thing he asked was is it exothermal (sp) and I said what?. He said how hot does it get.

A very low current draw and a fair amount of gas. So my thought, low power for a little gas, will that boost the mileage. I have a condensor in my car, I remove it and lose 40-50 miles per tank. Problem is, the large engine in my car I have no room for this thing. Another friend said put it in my jeep and we can see if it works.

Now this is the point were I say, it did not do what I expected. It did not get hot.. So why not mix a little of its gas in the carb (air filter) and see what happends?

Hey, I was bored over the holiday, built a game show buzzer (I found an old schematic I did for a guy here and said let's make one). The kids and I just wasted a couple more hours tonight with it. I spent time with the kids and most of the questions were educational.. One was "name a Spice girl". And no one got it (I was the game show controller so I could not play).

Also, my friend is a chemist not an EE. He sent me this knowing not to talk his language... Hope he does not mind me posting this one. And he will never wind up here. I called him to see why this worked.

His comment to that EMAIL.

Water is an interesting compound, because of its structure it is in an interesting natural resonance. Without getting too technical, the electrical charges do not balance on the bonds, so the H=O=H double bonds (not truly double bonds) have to share charges. This is done by the charge resonating through the bonds from one side to the other:
+H-O=H- <--> -H=O-H+
This is because Oxygen is normally a -2 charge and Hydrogen is a +1 charge.
In order to maintain this structure it resonates.
When you place an electrical charge through the water (pure water does not conduct electricity much) electrolytes in the water (salts, acids) conduct electricity and this pulls the bonds apart by attracting the uneven resonance charges. Depending on how strong the electrolytes (salts, acids), temperature, etc.; this influences how much current is needed to break the bonds, each at their repective electrodes. The hydrogens join to form Hydrogen gas. Which is very stable; and the oxygens to form Oxygen gas. The electrodes give the missing charge through electricity to form the stable bonds.
Is that what you wanted to hear? I hope so. Otherwise, I am not sure what you want me to say. I could say it works because God wanted it to work that way, but that doesn't quite explain it.
That is why resonance frequency can influence the power needed to break the bonds. If you can resonate the molecule at its natural frequency it is just like a glass. It resonates itself, stretching the bonds. Thus less electrical energy is needed to break it apart. Which you probably already know.
In the Linnard Griffin process, he uses metal catalysts to lower the energy needed to break the bonds. This is a chemical reaction.
OK, I've babbled enough. Thanks for your help.